This seems strange, and I suspect the truth lays somewhere in the middle. I never accept anecdotal evidence I see on the internet because it is just one side of the story and will of course be biased. How normal is it for a cruise line to discern cabin damage and suddenly restrain passengers on debarkation day? I mean, you are typically gone before a cabin steward even gets in the room. And even if they did, what legal authority do they have to detain you? Certainly not for a damage claim. This sounds fishy to me and I view it with a jaundiced eye.

When I read this, I figured, the steward threw the family under the bus, for damage he did, and didn't document. The end result of this situation, seems so extreme, it boggles the mind...you would think the pictures would be the best kind of proof..and doesn't this look like typical wear and tear? I need more info as well....

Is it just me or does the kid in the second photo, half on the dresser and half in the floor, with what looks like a glass of wine in front of him look a little odd in the photo??
More to the story than what's reported in that article.
If I were accused of damaging something I don't think I would wait to be banned--I'd ban myself from doing business with them again--but there's more to this than what's been reported here.

Is it just me or does the kid in the second photo, half on the dresser and half in the floor, with what looks like a glass of wine in front of him look a little odd in the photo??
More to the story than what's reported in that article.
If I were accused of damaging something I don't think I would wait to be banned--I'd ban myself from doing business with them again--but there's more to this than what's been reported here.

It looks to me like there are two glass of wine in front of a kid with a finger on a corkscrew. The kid could be acting or tired or whatever, but also could be intoxicated.

Dates are easy to add/change on photographs.

The truth is somewhere in between, but is clearly slanted in the article. I doubt Carnival will comment. I don't believe the original story is gospel.

Is it just me or does the kid in the second photo, half on the dresser and half in the floor, with what looks like a glass of wine in front of him look a little odd in the photo??
More to the story than what's reported in that article.
If I were accused of damaging something I don't think I would wait to be banned--I'd ban myself from doing business with them again--but there's more to this than what's been reported here.

It looks to me like there are two glass of wine in front of a kid with a finger on a corkscrew. The kid could be acting or tired or whatever, but also could be intoxicated.

Dates are easy to add/change on photographs.

The truth is somewhere in between, but is clearly slanted in the article. I doubt Carnival will comment. I don't believe the original story is gospel.

So now the cat's got both Celebrity's and Carnival's tongues
Not being judgemental, but I hope the staff of Fascination are ready to sign off on my pictures when I board. I'll take a copy of the story too, just in case they don't know what I'm on about.
I can understand to some extent Celebrity's situation; there were two passengers involved. But Carnival has no privacy issue to hide behind.

__________________
Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others. ---Groucho Marx
Navigator of the Seas 2005, 2006
Holiday 2005, 2006, 2008
Sovereign of the Seas 2007
Carnival Fantasy 2008
Carnival Fascination 9/14/09
Freedom of the Seas 11/28/10

[
So now the cat's got both Celebrity's and Carnival's tongues
Not being judgemental, but I hope the staff of Fascination are ready to sign off on my pictures when I board. I'll take a copy of the story too, just in case they don't know what I'm on about.
I can understand to some extent Celebrity's situation; there were two passengers involved. But Carnival has no privacy issue to hide behind.

Just post them on the Internet BEFORE or DURING, not AFTER the cruise.

Or email them to someone from the ship. Preferably more than one someone.

I do take pictures of rental cars before I get in them, even if there is no obvious damage.

I always take pictures of my cabin, but that is usually for my website before I start opening beer bottles on the furniture.

This seems strange, and I suspect the truth lays somewhere in the middle. I never accept anecdotal evidence I see on the internet because it is just one side of the story and will of course be biased. How normal is it for a cruise line to discern cabin damage and suddenly restrain passengers on debarkation day? I mean, you are typically gone before a cabin steward even gets in the room. And even if they did, what legal authority do they have to detain you? Certainly not for a damage claim. This sounds fishy to me and I view it with a jaundiced eye.

Couldn't agree more. None of it passes the sniff test.
One thing I am sure of there's a lot more to this than meets the eye..

I believe that there is more to this then what is in the statement posted on the internet. If one looks at the letter that was supposedly signed by him it does not pertain to "damage".

Dear Mr Harvey,
This letter will confirm your discussion with Carnival Cruise Lines ("Carnival") personnel
where you were informed that you will not be permitted to sail onboard any Carnival
Cruise Lines vessel in the future. This decision was based on your actions on the
curfent cruise, which were a violation of the ship rules, interfered with the safety and/or
enjoyment of other guests on the ship or caused harm to Carnival.

While the statement on the blog states that Mr Harvey felt this was just a form type letter and that it did not represent the actual situation, I have to wonder, if it was indeed only "damage to furniture", then why such a ban or letter? There has to be more to the situation.

Also note that the "news release" was only posted on the "SquareMouth" site. I have done a search for this "news release" and no one has picked it up other then message boards and www.pressreleasepoint.com. With today's media, I find it surprising, that if this was a simple case of cabin damage, no one else has picked it up yet.

Just wondering. "IF" someone damaged the room, accidentally, does insurance cover any of the loss or damage? There's always such thang as an Oooops, some oppppss's could be costly. Would the normal regualr cruise insurance cover that?

Having interviewed a travel insurance executive once I recall him saying, "if it isn't in the policy they aren't going to cover it." And I have never seen a policy that says they cover accidental room damage. But if the cruise lines actually start banning people for this you may see them starting to cover it.

I just have to say this is the first time I have ever heard of a cruise line asking a tenant to be responsible for the room damage.

I am guessing something else entirely happened. Some people just dont know when to let something drop.

I'm not saying it was the ship or the passenger, I'm just saying some people.

So, with people flopping their arses overboard on a regular basis, getting into altercations and now the problem of damaging ships property, I guess it's inevitable that not too far in the future we will have the " cocoon " ships we have talked about,, wherein there's no exposed deck areas in order to eliminate the OB's, have double or triple security throughout the ship and I would guess that the cabin stewards will soon have to start taking photos or videos of the cabins between occupants to verify damages or lack thereof.
All the above at , of course, the expense of the 99 % of us cruisers who can manage to take a cruise or go out in public without making an ass of ourselves and not create problems for others.

So, with people flopping their arses overboard on a regular basis, getting into altercations and now the problem of damaging ships property, I guess it's inevitable that not too far in the future we will have the " cocoon " ships we have talked about,, wherein there's no exposed deck areas in order to eliminate the OB's, have double or triple security throughout the ship and I would guess that the cabin stewards will soon have to start taking photos or videos of the cabins between occupants to verify damages or lack thereof.
All the above at , of course, the expense of the 99 % of us cruisers who can manage to take a cruise or go out in public without making an ass of ourselves and not create problems for others.

John Heald just left the Freedom as the CD...and he wrote in his Blog about kids who were throwing the soft ice cream from the higher Atrium levels onto the DUO that plays in the lobby.

It was all over the piano, the sound equipment, the piano keys...and was so bad that the Duo could not perform their last set for that evening.

Not saying these were the kids....it could just be coincidence.....

__________________COMPLETES THE FLEET

If it is Carnival and it floats....we have sailed it!

Hubby ... DIAMOND (every ship except the Carnivale)
Me ... DIAMOND (every ship starting with the Tropicale)
20 year old son ... DIAMOND (every ship starting with the Tropicale...he is the only DOUBLE Milestone under the age of 21)
24 year old son ... DIAMOND

The letter says he is barred from all Carnival Cruise Lines vessels, (not corp)and it is signed by the captain of the ship - which means this didn't come from the corporate office. They may have known about it and been in on it, but they don't appear to have made up the document.

It appears to have been newly composed on the spot, not a form letter, since it says 'this is to confirm the conversation".

I am guessing this was another troublemaker and we are not getting the full story, just his side of the story.

The question is whether he was banned for life for something else that happened not at all related to this incident, or whether he was provoked into reacting by the room stewards accusations along the lines of Dean?

If he is a trouble-maker in general then I say good, ban him. But if cruise lines are to just start to become like bullies with a "you're banned" or even "you're off the ship" as the result then that is not good.

Now granted, I don't want to scare the less experienced cruisers that this is becoming a normal case, not at all, we've only had a few cases out of millions of cruisers. It is just that the stories we have heard are puzzling and unusual from our experience.

Now let me ask you - if he was banned simply because he DID damage the desk - would you think that is justified? Or if he was accused of marring the desk and he adamnatly swore he did not - and that is why he was banned, if you were the cruise line and you were sure he had marred the desk, is that alone still enough to ban someone?

To me, I have to believe there was a pattern of completely different things going on the whole time leading up to this. Maybe, as a note on the the other thread about this case pointed out, that there were some devil kids on that cruise throwing ice cream at the musicians, etc. I'm beginning to believe it is all related...

I do not believe this was solely the result of a marred desktop. If it is then I think the cruise line overreacted. Things such as the knarled wood documented in those photos surely happen at least a few times a year, and it is something that is easily fixed by a ship's carpenter with no loss of cabin usage. That can't be more than a few dollars worth of damage. Something else added to the final equation here.

I've been cruising on older vessels the past two years and my cabins have all had minor dents, dings, and scratches. I have never felt the need to document them in fear of being blamed for them.

Thanks for the update, My Mother used to have a saying, she used all the time....don't cut your nose off to spite your face...If I were this family, I would cut my nose off Pick another cruise line to sail on....

It also, once again, points out the power of the Internet and the convenience of being able to take unlimited pictures. It is a good thing the man had those pictures.

It is also a good thing that Carnival can look at the evidence and admit that a mistake was made. I often try to point out to people here that there are two worlds in cruise managent, the onboard and the onshore. Sometimes that have cross purposes.

I guess I can take back all those things I said about there being more to the story as well. In this case apparently there wasn't.

At least it didn't cost the man anything other than a little time and trouble.